The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1887-09-23

V91yYW !
An7asf SPITE
There was another buzz, followed by the \
rush OF correspondents 70 doors. When |
silence was restored, Justice Mulkey made
few remarks, saying while not wanting |
to 90 on record as agreeing with all the
court had said in the record, he thought i |
remarkable in so large document there
were so few errors, and what errors there
were did not affect the case in any vital |
point. Chief Justice sheldon then an
nounced the day Of execution. and the |
bulky opinion was handed down to the |
clerk.
OrrowA. ILL.,, Sept. 14.-The opinion OF |
the court sustains every point which was
argued by the prosecution. IL is docu-
ment Of between forty thousand and fifty !
thousand words. Judge Magruder was
the author. The date Of the execution |
was not decided upon until this morning
before assembling Of the court Last
night the document was finally discussed
and approved, but some OF the judges
were favorable for extending the date OF
I the execution until January. The majori- |
\ " held that in view Of the long period
which had elapsed since the crime was
4 committed, justice demanded that the law
1 should be enforced without any more de-
/ lay than necessary to prepare the souls OF
/ the prisoners for the final event. This
reasoning prevailed.
| II was a prcternaturally solemn moment
! In the court and all the judges were Affect
| ed with the solemnity II the proceedings.
| Within q few minutes all except Sheldon
|, had left the bench and had not reappeared
| until adjournment for dinner. Whether
Magruder, the Chicago member Of the
court, was selected by lot or rotation 20
write the opinion Is not known. The duty
generally falls % tho Justices by rotation,
| but il Is believed that this course was not
followed in the present case. but that
Mayruder was selected because Of his con-
nection with the district where the crime
was committed.
Judge Mulky's remarks were a. fol-
lows:
ut Is not my intention to offer sep
arate opinion. as should have done. de-
sire TO avail myself cf this occasion TO say
that while ! concur in the conclusion
reached, and also in the general views en-
tered in the opinion fled. do not wish TO
be understood rs holding that the record
il free from error. for l do not
think Il is. am, nevertheless. OF
the opinion that none Of the errors
complained OF are Of such serious charac-
ter as to require reversal Of Judgment.
In view OF the number Of defendants on
trial. the great length OF time consumed
in the trial, the vast amount Of testimony
offered and passed upon BY the court, and
| the almost numberlcss rulings the court
wasrequired to make, the wondermcnt 20
me is that errors were not more numerous
and OF more serious character.
I I'm short, after having fully examined
the record and given the questions arising
on Il nv very best thought, with an earn
/ est and conscientious effort to do my
whole duty, am fully satisfied that the
opinion reached vindicates the law and
does complete justice between the people
and the defendants, fully warranted by
the law and the evidence"
OTTAWA, ILL.,, Sept. 1.-The opinion Of
the Supreme Court as delivered by JUS
tice Magruder states that the case came
before the court by writ OF error 20 the
Criminal Court Of Cook County. The
plaintiffs in error were tried for murder
OF Matthias J. Degan, on May 4, 1856, in
the city Of Chicago. and on August 20,
1886 the jury found q verdict against
them.
Hero follows statement Of the Hay.
market tragedy. including details OF the
throwing among the policemen assembled
on the square Of dynamite bomb.l The
opinion says:
1T Is undisputed that the bomb was
thrown. II Is conceded that no one Of the
l defendants threw the bomb with his own
| hands. The plaintiffs In error are charged
with being accessories before the fact.v
The court then proceeds 10 examine the
sixty-nine counts in the indictment. Some
Of the counts charge that the defendants
being present, aided, Allotted and assisted
in the throwing OF the bomb; others, that
not being present, aiding, abetting o. -.
sisting, they advised, encouraged, aided
and abetted such throwing. Some Of the
counts charge that said defendants I'd
: vised. encouraged, aided and abetted ono
Rudolph SchnaubeIt In the perpetrafion Of
the crime; others that they advised, en-
coursged, aided and allotted an unknown
person in the preparation thereof
The Illinois statute, which defines %
accessory - be who stands by and aid
and abets, and which considers such nc
cessory a. principal, 70 be punished &C
cordingly, - quoted, and then the opin
} ion goes on 70 state that II therefore tn
D defendants, advised, encouraged, aided
or abetted the killing Of began, they ar
> q guilty as though they took his III
with their own hands. If any Of then
!, stood by and aided, abcttcd or assisted Il
) che throwing Of the bomb, those Of then
who did 70 ara ~ guilty - though thel
) threw II themselves.
! The questions which present thcmselvc
. ore these: Did the defendants have
}. common purpose or design 70 advise, en-
!, courage, aid or abet the murder Of Oh
J polcemanl Did they combine togethe